D-Dot Sensor Response Improvement in the Evaluation of High-Power Microwave Pulses
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper presents an investigation into the issue of measuring high-power microwave (HPM) pulses with a proposed method. However, the following issues should be addressed:
- The last paragraph in Introduction section should clearly highlight the novelty of your proposed work. Explain how your work is better than other similar works.
- The proposed method is not sufficiently explained in the paper. Section 3 should be thoroughly revised.
- Figures 4,5,6,8 have two subfigures each. Name and caption them as subfigures (a) and (b).
- It is better to include a table in Proposed Processing Method section, which should clearly compare the proposed work with research works reported in recent past.
- The shortcomings of the project should also be included with reasons.
- The English writing of the paper is poor. It needs a thorough review from an English expert.
Author Response
Please see the attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The contents of the manuscript resulted to be interesting and well focused. Evaluation of high power microwave pulses is important for military applications, but also for security (terrorism, crime, and so on). And it is not easy to measure such signals, as they are strongly powerful and many comercial devices would crash when receiving these radiations.
The proposal is smart, separating the analogue electronics that gather and attenuate the pulses from the instruments used to analyse the characteristics of the emissions.
I suggest to review the Introduction, as there are some paragraphs that do not fit with the rest (i.e. lines from 54 to 64).
Figure 8 bottom seems to be a mistake when selecting the plots. Please, check that.
Conclusions must be extended and improved.
I also suggest to review the spelling of many words (there are several typos), and the grammar in some sentences, which are difficult to understand. Please special care to line 228-229.
Author Response
Please see the attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
All the responses by authors are satisfactory. No more comments.